Ben Thompson’s long piece on Intel is a fantasic read, starting with the history of CISC v. RISC computing, moving on to the rise of mobile and why Intel lost that battle, through the company’s current management and board struggles and ends with a call for the US government to save Intel in a Manhattan project to develop AGI.
If the U.S. is serious about AGI, then the true Manhattan Project — doing something that will be very expensive and not necessarily economically rational — is filling in the middle of the sandwich. Saving Intel, in other words.
Start with the fact that we know that leading AI model companies are interested in dedicated chips; OpenAI is reportedly working on its own chip with Broadcom, after flirting with the idea of building its own fabs. The latter isn’t viable for a software company in a world where TSMC exists, but it is for the U.S. government if it’s serious about domestic capabilities continuing to exist. The same story applies to Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta.
To that end, the U.S. government could fund an independent Intel foundry — spin out the product group along with the clueless board to Broadcom or Qualcomm or private equity — and provide price support for model builders to design and buy their chips there.
…
This is all pretty fuzzy, to be clear. What does exist, however, is a need — domestically sourced and controlled AI, which must include chips — and a company, in Intel, that is best placed to meet that need, even as it needs a rescue. Intel lost its reason to exist, even as the U.S. needs it to exist more than ever; AI is the potential integration point to solve both problems at the same time.
Emphasis mine.